This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the FAQ and RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate and remove the ads - it's free!

Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Originally Posted by VanceMack

Dont know...do you? He resisted arrest and died...remember? It didnt go to trial. What we DO know is that the officer observed what he determined to be criminal behavior (on charges similar to some of the 30 prior convictions he had).

So because he "resisted" (I use this term EXTREMELY loosely, based on the tape; his "resistance" endangered nobody and was token at worst), that renders the question of whether the attempted arrest was justified moot?

Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Originally Posted by Kobie

So because he "resisted" (I use this term EXTREMELY loosely, based on the tape; his "resistance" endangered nobody and was token at worst), that renders the question of whether the attempted arrest was justified moot?

Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Originally Posted by ttwtt78640

As did all of the other factors listed in the coroner's report. Absent those other factors then the brief use of force would not have been fatal.

In my view, the contributing factors are relevant but they are not dismissive of the officer's role in the man's death. If a person with a heart condition is punched by another person and dies, the person throwing the punch is still guilty of his role in the death of the other person because failing the punch, the other person may not have died for years to come. It's the same principle behind if you punch someone and they lose their balance and fall, banging their head on the pavement and then suffer brain damage from the fall and die. Your punch didn't directly cause the brain damage, but you contributed to the final result and are therefore partially responsible.

"Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.

Re: No Indictment in Chokehold Death

Originally Posted by Ockham

I agree - it was an accident. I don't see the police trying to kill this guy purposefully - and that is why there are laws such as negligent homicide and various levels of manslaughter on the books for just such an event. I'm not looking to nail this cop - only give him his day in court and let a jury decide if he just did his job or if he did his job badly and aiding in the death of a suspect. Reasonable no?

In a way, a trial is a way for the community to comment on levels of use of force in such situations and what they find reasonable and acceptable. It provides police with oversight outside of their ranks. It's the way society passes judgement on both the law and the actions of people. It's why jury nullification is important - it tells government the law is flawed. If, during a very public trial, the jury found this officer guilty of some lesser crime contributing to the man's death, it would be instructive to other officers in such situations. Such checks on police are valuable, in my view.

"Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley Jr.